4 ms·
I agree 100%. I first had this thought last night when reading “Eight Things to Know about LLMs” (select quote from section 8 below)[0] > Simply prompting a mo
by CSSer 3y ago
I agree 100%. I first had this thought last night when reading “Eight Things to Know about LLMs” (select quote from section 8 below)[0]
> Simply prompting a model to “think step by step” can lead it to perform well on entire categories of math and reasoning problems that it would otherwise fail on (Kojima et al., 2022). Similarly, even observing that an LLM consistently fails at some task is far from sufficient evidence that no other LLM can do that task (Bowman, 2022).
The eerie thing to me is that this is coaching. I have never coached anything that isn’t alive by any definition. My feelings about this realization are ambivalent.
[0]: https://cims.nyu.edu/~sbowman/eightthings.pdf https://cims.nyu.edu/~sbowman/eightthings.pdf
- kristov 3y agoDoesn't prompting "think step by step" simply increase the probability the model will generate its output in the style of places where it saw "step by step" before (eg: tutorial content)? It's not really "deciding" to think step by step. Maybe I am mistaken.